ArticleJBMR plus2025
Conotoxins from sea snails as potential bone remodeling disruptors.
Article in JBMR plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Marine Peptides to Oncology: The Therapeutic Potential of Conotoxins in Cancer Treatment.Chemistry & biodiversity · 2026Review
- Multivariate genetic analysis reveals three distinct pathological dimensions in musculoskeletal disorders.Nature communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ocean provides food and shelter to diverse marine species, and it is an exceptional source of potential bioactive natural products with promising medicinal properties. Among these, α-conotoxins from venom sea snails show tremendous potential. Our study characterized the effects of synthetic α-conotoxins, sXm1b and sVc1.1, on bone remodeling. Transcriptomic analysis showed significant modulation of critical biological processes, leading to increased osteoclast activity and decreased osteoblast mineralization. sXm1b and sVc1.1 treatment also promoted genes involved in osteoblast and osteoclast proliferation. Interestingly, sVC1.1 showed higher osteoclast gene modulation and reduced the expression of genes critical for osteoblast development and differentiation. In vitro, functional evaluations demonstrated increased osteoclastogenesis and resorption, along with decreased differentiation and mineralization by osteoblasts. In a 3D ex vivo calvaria culture model, these conotoxins significantly decreased bone area, increased osteoclast number, and modulated the expression of osteoclast- and osteoblast-related genes. The findings highlight the promise of α-conotoxins as modulators of bone remodeling for treating non-genetic bone mass accumulation problems while also cautioning about potential adverse effects on bone in individuals undergoing conotoxin therapy for pain management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.